If we won't get 1st 2nd or 3rd draft pick, i would be not against trading our pick to land star player for example Josh Smith. Atlanta should be given up on him and the team lack of motivation, they need changes, so we could offer our pick and maybe Jose, ED/Amir and/or JJ for Josh, and after that sign Nash as free agent

I'm not with the program for Nash (the second best point guard in the league last year), especially if you simply amnesty Calderon (the fifth best point guard in the league last year).

You're trading a 38 year old for a 30 year old.
The 38 year old has 4 more assists per game ... but 3 more turnovers.
Both are above average shooters; the 38 year old being better.

If you were trying to win this coming year, you might take a one year gamble on the 38 year old to push an otherwise strong team over the top. If your window is 2-3 years out, and you already have a strong PG, why look to do a marginal upgrade to fix what isn't broken?

If we won't get 1st 2nd or 3rd draft pick, i would be not against trading our pick to land star player for example Josh Smith. Atlanta should be given up on him and the team lack of motivation, they need changes, so we could offer our pick and maybe Jose, ED/Amir and/or JJ for Josh, and after that sign Nash as free agent

The reality of it all is Colangelo needs to insure his own survival and signing Steve Nash is the best way to accomplish that without question.

I guess thereinlies the problem. Will Nash help the Raptors or will he help Colangelo? thats tough, cause its hard to say what condition he would be in next year at age 38/39. And as quicker point guards come into the league, Westbrook, Rose, Wall, Irving, can he actively play defence/Casey build a defensive scheme to hide Nash's deficiencies.

Back to the forum title, the only way we can 'contend' for Nash IMO is (1) if he has desire to play in Canada,(2) we can offer him decent money, and (3) we make drastic improvements to our current roaster. (i.e., proven vets who can score and defend)

The big difference between those guys and Nash is Nash makes those around him better. I think that is very important.

Also Iggy makes $3M more than Nash would at $10M and Granger about the same.

I could live with Batum at $10M but it would be a huge gamble based on continued development and consistency.

Jeff Green at $10M is scary, in my opinion.

i thought about this point and I realized that there may be some negative effects to this. I.e. what happens to guys like Diaw, q-rich, dudley, etc. is they become the players they truly are when Nash leaves, and then you are left overpaying some guy who is putting up career numbers for a couple of years and then sucks for the rest of his career. It's a testament to how great of a player Nash is, but don't you think we could end up overpaying some guys on our team who we have now because we are given a sense of false security about them?

i thought about this point and I realized that there may be some negative effects to this. I.e. what happens to guys like Diaw, q-rich, dudley, etc. is they become the players they truly are when Nash leaves, and then you are left overpaying some guy who is putting up career numbers for a couple of years and then sucks for the rest of his career. It's a testament to how great of a player Nash is, but don't you think we could end up overpaying some guys on our team who we have now because we are given a sense of false security about them?

That is a valid concern.

I'm not sure what the answer is.

I guess one can only hope a young point guard is found sooner than later who can have a similar effect as Nash.

Given his current production, he is not a $10M player in my opinion (13.9 points, 4.6 rebounds, 1.9 assists, 1 steal, 1 block, on 45%FG and 39% 3pt).

The gamble, in my opinion, is that he would consistently become the player we saw in February through early March. He has shown he can be a great player but not consistent..... yet?

And it's not just his offense. This is from Hollinger's profile of Batum: "The big mystery with Batum is why he's had so much trouble converting tremendous defensive talent into decent defensive performance. His defensive stats last season [2010-11] were horrible -- Synergy rated him the second-worst small forward, and the Blazers gave up 4.19 points per 100 possessions more with Batum on the court."

His performance this year is a bit better. However, according to 82games.com, he's still the only player among those playing at least 50% of the time who is a negative in the On Court/Off Court stat. http://www.82games.com/1112/1112POR.HTM

At $6-7 million, he would be a good pickup, but at $10m, he's not (like Matt said).

And it's not just his offense. This is from Hollinger's profile of Batum: "The big mystery with Batum is why he's had so much trouble converting tremendous defensive talent into decent defensive performance. His defensive stats last season [2010-11] were horrible -- Synergy rated him the second-worst small forward, and the Blazers gave up 4.19 points per 100 possessions more with Batum on the court."

His performance this year is a bit better. However, according to 82games.com, he's still the only player among those playing at least 50% of the time who is a negative in the On Court/Off Court stat. http://www.82games.com/1112/1112POR.HTM

At $6-7 million, he would be a good pickup, but at $10m, he's not (like Matt said).

The "little" problem we have is that Portland will probably match close to twice that. What one is really doing with Batum is paying for the level he is yet to achieve. It's when the big boys do their job evaluating the player's bb skills, his maturity and how he would fit in on the new team....and then pull the trigger if they must. Portland seems to be making all the right noises about matching whatever...we should at least try and call their bluff with a front loaded deal to at least make them think hard. This would have to be in the 12 range for the first 2 yrs to have any effect.

i think im one of the few people on here thats for signing nash and keeping calderon to back him up. i still think that we gotta get some vets in here to balance all the youth we ahve and are going to add. again this is all based on where/who we draft.

If we draft a SF(mkg, barnes, etc),id look to resign bayless to a short and friendly extension, and play him behind demar at the 2. playing him and calderon together last year wasnt so bad, we actually closed out a few games with them on together. he could also spell nash or calderon at pg if needed, but im sure everyone here is weary of bayless holding the ball for too long.

Whether it be Nash or Jose, the Raptors would still have to find the successor at the PG spot since I do not foresee either one being a capable starting point guard in around 3 years time.

It's either or for me, really. But not both.

Has anyone else wondered why Jose was played far more this year than a younger Bayless (who happens to be in his contract year and has showed big numbers when given minutes) in a year when we are "building"?

My theory is to drive down his value so they could resign him at a fair price then unleash him next year.

“I don’t create controversies. They’re there long before I open my mouth. I just bring them to your attention.”

i think im one of the few people on here thats for signing nash and keeping calderon to back him up. i still think that we gotta get some vets in here to balance all the youth we ahve and are going to add. again this is all based on where/who we draft.

I really like the idea ... plus, they'd both be injury protection for each other - so we'd never suffer a huge falloff in talent.
-The issue is, having $20M this year devoted to PG's means you better find an upgrade at the SF for pretty cheap.

The only way to bag a classy lady is to give her two tickets to the gun show... and see if she likes the goods.

But if your purpose is to develop young players as outlined at the start of the season, whether it means losing games (which they still did), then I don't see the point of letting Jose play 35+ mins.

I get that he is better, but when Jose went out and JB played as a starter, he was pretty good himself.

Because Jose was one of the players on the team that the coaches trusted (there weren't that many of them). Sometimes, it just comes down to that. Anyway, Jose might be around longer than people might think.

Developing youth was indeed the goal, but what the Raptors brass neglected to tell us was that not all youth are created equal. DeRozan is really the only player (between himself, Bayless, and Davis) who Colangelo sees as part of the "core". He got minutes combined with a long leash, while the others did not. After all, Casey was trying to win as many games as possible.

DeRozan was a high lottery pick. He has a perceived upside that's higher than the other guys you mentioned and he had no other key core piece competing with him for minutes. He also works extremely hard. That's why he got the opportunities he got.